Most Americans view soap as essential to bathing as water. The daily grind confronts us with dirt, germs, and sweat, and a soapy shower provides the simple, pleasurable antidote. Uncontroversial though soap may seem, some people are very troubled by your sudsy lather: dermatologists. “If you talk to most dermatologists, probably none of them use actual soap, except on their hands,” says Dr. Erin Chen, herself a dermatologist at Massachusetts General Hospital. Advertisement Here’s what Chen and four other experts say about avoiding soap, healthier substitutes, and tips to make sure your cleaning rituals aren’t accidentally undermining your skin health. The many downsides of soap Soap rubs skin the wrong way for several reasons. It “contains many ingredients that just don’t do well for the skin,” says Dr. Anthony Rossi, a dermatologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Soap combines fats or oils with sodium hydroxide (in the case of soap bars) or potassium hydroxide (for liquid soap). These ingredients are very effective at breaking down dirt—too effective, in that they cause irritation and damage to the lipids that keep the skin strong and hydrated, Rossi says. A study in healthy volunteers showed that washing with soap disrupts the skin barrier, and the more times soap was applied and rinsed while cleaning, the more disruption occurred. Such affronts lead to dry skin, sensitivity, and increased risk of infection, says the study’s author, David Voegeli, an immuno-pharmacologist and nursing professor at the University of Winchester in England. Advertisement Restoring a city’s charm Branded Content Restoring a city’s charm By China Daily The study also showed that soap changed the skin’s acidity. This happens because soap has a lower acidity level than the skin, and the mismatch upsets the skin’s pH balance. Soap may be especially problematic if it’s not rinsed off thoroughly, which is more likely with bar soap than the liquid variety. “The residue just stays there and disrupts the pH balance for longer,” Voegeli says. Read More: 12 Weird Symptoms Dermatologists Say You Should Never Ignore Changing the pH level has a domino effect because “pH is also really important for the skin’s microbial defense,” Rossi says. A related problem is that soap’s chemicals clear out the bacteria from our skin. Nice as that may sound, many such bacteria are actually key to protecting skin health. Many soaps contain yet more chemicals that have nothing to do with cleaning and everything to do with creating a fragrant facade of cleanliness. These fragrance chemicals, while psychologically pleasing, can lead to irritation and allergies. “You would never tolerate perfume or scent in your eye drops,” says Dr. Rachel Nazarian, a dermatologist at Mt. Sinai Hospital. “Why do we disrespect the skin by putting all of this flowery, fluffy garbage in soap?

Extreme winds and possible storms expected on Tuesday have forced the cancellation of Mardi Gras parades in Jefferson Parish, La., as officials in neighboring New Orleans moved up parade starting times because of the forecast. The National Weather Service is warning that strong winds, with gusts reaching up to 60 miles per hour, will begin early in the morning, creating potentially hazardous conditions for parade floats and spectators. “I’m going to cut to the chase with very disappointing news,” the Jefferson Parish president, Cynthia Lee Sheng, said at a news conference on Monday. “Tomorrow’s weather, especially the gusty winds, is severe enough that we have no other choice other than to cancel our scheduled parades for tomorrow.” There are two parades in Jefferson Parish on Mardi Gras. The Krewe of Argus was scheduled to roll with 20 floats through Metairie, La., followed by the Krewe of Elks Jeffersonians with 43 floats. Collin Arnold, the director of New Orleans Homeland Security, told New Orleans’s Fox affiliate that strong winds could create a public safety hazard for the floats, riders and spectators in the early part of the day, with the potential for tornadoes and thunderstorms later in the afternoon. The New Orleans Police Department said on social media that it was adjusting the starting times of its Zulu and Rex parades, with Zulu set to begin earlier at 7 a.m., and Rex starting around 9 a.m. Both would be slightly pared down, with “no additional elements,” officials said. Ms. Sheng, the Jefferson Parish president, noted that, historically, transit buses stop operating when wind gusts exceed 35 m.p.h., and Entergy, the region’s public utility, forbids workers from going up in bucket trucks unless the winds are blowing at 30 m.p.h. or less. Because the strong winds are expected so early in the morning, Ms. Sheng said, it was not practical for officials to consider an earlier parade start time. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT “Let me state the obvious: These are not conditions where we would invite families, including the elderly and children, to stand on our streets out in the open,” she said. “These are not conditions for people to be elevated on floats.” “We have kids on ladders, we have maids with beautiful head pieces,” she added. Ms. Sheng said it would be up to the parade organizers to decide whether to reschedule the parades for a later date.The cancellation of the Jefferson Parish parades came as a powerful weather system was moving east from New Mexico and Texas, bringing severe conditions as early as Monday evening to parts of southeast Kansas, Oklahoma and North Texas. Meteorologists predict that strengthening winds and an influx of warm, moist air from the Gulf will create favorable conditions for severe weather. By Tuesday afternoon and evening, conditions in the region will be ripe for severe storms, especially in Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi. Forecasters have warned of damaging gusts, hail and possible tornadoes from eastern Oklahoma through Alabama. The Storm Prediction Center has issued an enhanced risk, a level three out of five, for severe weather across these areas, warning of damaging wind gusts, tornadoes and large hail.

This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox. That, right there, is how it’s done. Sen. Cory Booker, the New Jersey Democrat who has long been a believer that his party should not shy from a fight out of fear, held the Senate floor for more than 25 hours in a history-making show of defiance of President Donald Trump’s chaos-laced agenda. Booker, beginning Monday evening, owned the podium where he stood without any real break in a bold display that drew fellow Democrats to the floor to watch in admiration. They might have done well to take notes about how, even in the minority, their party still can find ways to inspire voters in the face of Trumpism. “I rise tonight because I believe, sincerely, that our country is in crisis,” Booker said as he began at 6:59 p.m. on Monday. When he wrapped up at 8:05 p.m. on Tuesday, he was visibly exhausted as he invoked the marching orders from civil rights icon and lawmaker John Lewis. “This is a moral moment. It’s not left or right. It’s right or wrong. Let’s get in good trouble. My friend, Madam President, I yield the floor,” he said as fellow Democrats erupted in applause. As his party has struggled to find footing in this second Trump term, Booker showed his colleagues that protest has power. His performance ended as Democrats were quietly losing twin special elections in deep-red House districts in Florida. Booker’s prescription for wayward Democrats seemed to be about showing up and using their present powers rather than chasing long-shot causes or hoping Republicans will bow to pressure from anyone but Trump. “I confess that I have been imperfect. I confess that I've been inadequate to the moment,” Booker said a little before noon on Tuesday. “I confess that the Democratic Party has made terrible mistakes that gave a lane to this demagogue. I confess we all must look in the mirror and say 'we will do better.'" Booker, in the Senate since 2013 and a promising but unsuccessful presidential candidate in 2020, broke the previous speech record of the modern era, one made by avowed segregationist Strom Thurman in 1957 while blocking a civil rights package. Lost on no one was that Booker is Black, a figure whose right to vote let alone serve in the Senate is in contradiction to the viewpoint that made Thurman a hero to the segregationist South. Since Trump’s re-election in November, Democrats’ fury has lacked a vessel, let alone a strategy. Some in the party began the year contemplating cooperation on some areas where they thought there could be common ground, such as infrastructure spending and trade deals. But that optimism has largely vanished and little else has emerged as a backstop in Washington beyond hope that states’ attorneys general and legislatures can stand in the breach. “Twelve hours now I’m standing, and I’m still going strong because this President is wrong, and he’s violating principles that we hold dear and principles in this document that are so clear and plain,” Booker said, holding a copy of the Constitution at roughly his halfway point. US-POLITICS-CONGRESS-SENATE-BOOKER Supporters of Senator Cory Booker hold signs outside the US Capitol as he speaks on the Senate floor in Washington, DC, on April 1, 2025. Roberto Schmidt—AFP via Getty Images Booker, a powerful orator and tough legislator, has often risen to the moment. During his 2020 presidential bid—which ended before Iowa even caucused—he found ways to push his party to reckon with tough realities. His campaign for a monument to Black Wall Street, where a race riot destroyed a prosperous neighborhood in Tulsa, recentered a big part of the conversation about identity in the United States. Similarly, his speech about gun violence and racial equity at Charleston, S.C.,’s Mother Emanuel Church laid down the 2020 campaign’s high-water mark for civil rights discourse. This week, it was a similar clarity that came from his podium—often speaking to just himself. Booker clearly did not mind. He felt he was on a righteous course. To be clear, no single speech—even a marathon test of endurance and intention—is going to throw Trump’s agenda completely off the rails. Just as surely as Booker held the Senate floor, Trump holds the Senate’s majority. If Trump and Senate Majority Leader John Thune play their cards carefully, they can wedge a whole lot of their agenda across the finish line with a bare majority, sidestepping the need for any Democratic votes. It’s a lot messier in the House, but Trump has yet to lose a major vote under Speaker Mike Johnson. It’s why, at their core, Democrats are slouching around the Capitol with a sense of irrelevance and contempt. Booker’s show gave those despondent Democrats reason to think that they still can muster some meaningful, dynamic opposition. It’s tough to overstate just how much heart his protest performance offered his party. “More Americans need to stand up and say enough is enough,” he said. The message, it seemed, was finding open ears. On TikTok, Booker’s live stream snagged more than 200 million likes. Even some Republican lawmakers expressed admiration, including Sen. Ted Cruz who took the floor hostage in 2013 over Obamacare. “As ⁦@CoryBooker⁩ approaches my 21-hour filibuster record, I’m contemplating pulling the fire alarm….” Cruz tweeted. But Republicans also understood that the show here was not going to derail their plans for a spending plan to get them to the Oct. 1 start of the federal fiscal year. The two chambers are on track to push through mismatched spending frameworks, both replete with spending cuts, and work out their differences later. That is likely to complicate things for Republicans, but they’ve shown plenty of pliability when the White House—and Trump, specifically—comes down hard on lawmakers who may balk at this novel approach. For his part, Booker only offered to stand and speak. “My voice is inadequate,” Booker said. “My efforts today are inadequate to stop what they’re trying to do. But we the people are powerful.” Perhaps. That power may find a hard limit against Trumpism, but at least someone is starting to test it inside the Democratic Party.

International trading partners and U.S. consumers alike are watching closely for what President Donald Trump does on April 2, which he has dubbed “Liberation Day.” That’s when the President will announce a sweeping set of reciprocal tariffs—which involve levying taxes on imported goods at the same rate that U.S. exports are taxed. President Trump has claimed that such tariffs would increase domestic jobs and bring companies back to the country. But his policies could upend existing trade relations and will come at a hefty price for the American consumer. “This is a prelude to act one of a global trade war. Then, I think we will see the reality as not America first but America alone,” Brown University economics professor Şebnem Kalemli-Özcan told TIME. “Nobody will want to trade with the U.S. and nobody [will] want to do business with the U.S.” Typically, the cost incurred by companies hit with tariffs is passed down to the consumer. The price of electronics, for example, will rise by some 10% based on existing tariffs, according to the Budget Lab. Now, everything from apparel to wine is in Trump’s crosshairs. Low-and-middle-income Americans will face the brunt of the tariffs, research shows. Experts say that many families do not have enough financial income to smooth out the shock of the increased prices of goods. The expected tariffs come after Trump signed a presidential memorandum in February calling for fairness in U.S. trade relationships. “Gone are the days of America being taken advantage of: this plan will put the American worker first, improve our competitiveness in every area of industry, reduce our trade deficit, and bolster our economic and national security,” the White House fact sheet reads. The trade policies are also part of a broader effort by the Administration to raise funds to counteract the tax breaks given to the wealthiest Americans. But tariffs alone can’t fix the U.S. trade deficit. Kalemli-Özcan says that the tariffs will isolate American companies, making them lose access to foreign innovations and technological advances. Without policies to promote domestic manufacturing, industries would be disrupted. “Starting a whole industry, [and having] it come up to scale so that you really satisfy demand of all U.S. consumers—that's going to [take] nothing short of a decade,” she says. “At that point, we are going to have a very sluggish economy because we killed the dynamics of our economy.” The exact details of the new reciprocal tariffs remain unknown. But there are a few general ways they might hit the average person. Even before the new tariffs are announced, China, the world’s largest trading partner, is facing a 20% tariff, which increased from the initial 10% tariff imposed in early February. On the campaign trail, Trump teased a potential tariff of 60% or higher on all Chinese imports. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget U.S. Budget Watch, a nonprofit, estimated such a tax would eventually cause a loss in U.S. revenue as the high tax would likely decrease imports from China by some 85%. China is the largest supplier of goods to the U.S., sending telephones, computers, and electric batteries—meaning the prices of those products will increase. China has retaliated with a 15% tax on U.S. agricultural products such as chicken and wheat, while soybeans, pork, and fruit will see a 10% tariff. China’s government has also blocked a number of U.S. companies from operating in China, the New York Times reported. The actions put the livelihood of farmers at risk as local Chinese suppliers may seek alternatives to the goods imported from U.S. “This is not something the U.S. holds all the cards in,” Kalemli-Özcan says. Chinese traders can opt to purchase foreign fruit and poultry from other countries, while U.S. farmers may not be able to find other buyers as easily. Trump, however, indicated that he could decrease tariffs on China as a bargaining chip for the sale of TikTok, which must divest from parent company Byte Dance and find a U.S.-based owner by April 5. Meanwhile, Mexico and Canada—the two biggest trading partners of the U.S. which have historically been close allies—are facing a 25% tariff on all goods. The Budget Lab, which modeled the effects of such tariffs, estimates that the cost of fresh produce in U.S. grocery stores will increase by 2.9%. Avocados, about 90% of which come from neighboring Mexico, would certainly increase in price. And prior to the announcement of the 25% auto tariff, the report found that motor vehicle prices for U.S. car buyers could rise by 6.1%. In the end, consumers and companies will remain in limbo as the Administration continues its fluctuating tariff policy. “The uncertainties are telling the consumer ‘don't consume,’ telling the businesses ‘cut your investment…do not hire new workers,’ because [of] the outlook,” Kalemli-Özcan says. A recession might not come as a direct result of the tariffs, but she predicts a definite “slowdown in economic growth” from such policies.

It wasn’t too long ago that Donald Trump relished taking credit for moving the stock market. During his first term he routinely told supporters to check the gains on their 401Ks. The day before he took office, Trump told political supporters at a rally, “I don't want to say this—it's too braggadocious—but we'll say it anyway, the Trump effect. It's you. You're the effect. Since the election, the stock market has surged.” That’s changed. Since Trump took office, the stock market has faltered. The uncertainty around Trump’s vows to move forward with punishing tariffs on imports has rattled investors; the S&P 500 and Nasdaq just finished out their worst quarter since 2022. And new polling shows that Americans are losing faith in how Trump is handling the economy. But Trump’s not backing down. On Wednesday, he’s expected to announce sweeping across-the-board tariffs on imported goods during a Rose Garden ceremony that he’s promoting as “Liberation Day” and the “rebirth of our country.” While Trump has promised that his new tariffs will pressure companies to open more factories inside the U.S. and lead to better trade deals with other countries, prominent economists and researchers for banks predict the new tariffs will lead to fewer jobs, a higher unemployment rate, and a drop in the U.S. gross domestic product. In mid-March, JPMorgan Chase lowered its prediction for GDP growth because of the uncertainty around Trump’s trade policy. Real GDP growth of the U.S. economy would be 1.6% in 2025, J.P. Morgan Research predicted, down 0.3% from its previous estimates. Part of the volatility in the stock market has been a response to the unpredictability of Trump’s stop-and-start tariff actions over the past few weeks. While announcing and then cancelling some tariffs, he has managed to impose a 25% tariff on steel and aluminum imports and a similar tariff on auto imports. Trump has telegraphed that his tariff announcement Wednesday would be broad and sweeping, with few exceptions. “You’d start with all countries,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One on Sunday. Trump has acknowledged that Americans need to brace themselves for some economic pain. During Trump’s address to Congress in March, he said, “There will be a little disturbance. But we’re OK with that. It won’t be much.” A few days later, speaking with Maria Bartiromo on Fox News, Trump called the impact of his tariffs, “a little disruption.” “Look, what I have to do is build a strong country. You can't really watch the stock market,” Trump said. Karoline Leavitt on Tuesday was asked what Trump has to say to Americans who rely on their retirement accounts and have concerns about the fluctuations in the stock market. “Well, certainly they are legitimate concerns, and the president takes those concerns very seriously, and he’s addressing them every single day,” Leavitt said. Recent polling has shown that an increasing number of Americans are worried about the impact Trump’s actions are having on the U.S. economy. A Fox News poll conducted in mid-March found that 53% of voters thought tariffs harm the U.S. economy and 28% believed they help. The poll also found 69% of voters think tariffs make products more expensive, a view shared by mainstream economists. An AP-NORC pool conducted at the end of March found that 60% of US adults disapprove of Trump’s handling of trade negotiations. As Trump’s rolled out his economic plans, fewer and fewer Americans think his ideas will help them financially, according to a CBS News/YouGov poll. At the end of March, that poll found that 23% of Americans thought Trump’s policies would make them financially better off, a drop from 42% in January. The next several months will be a test for Trump’s theory that increasing tariffs will ultimately strengthen the American economy. “There is substantial disagreement about the effect of tariffs between most economists and some key people in the White House,” says Whit Ayres, a long-time Republican strategist and pollster. “We’re gonna end up finding out who’s right.”

Democrats have been struggling to energize their frustrated base since losing all three branches of government in the November 2024 election. Senator Cory Booker may have found a way. For more than 25 hours, the New Jersey Democrat stood at the Senate lectern speaking against President Donald Trump’s policies in what may be the most dramatic and sustained public challenge to Trump’s agenda since his return to the White House. By Tuesday evening, Booker, his voice hoarse but unwavering, broke the record for the longest speech in Senate history, which was previously held by Senator Strom Thurmond, a South Carolina segregationist who spoke for 24 hours and 18 minutes in opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Booker began speaking at 7 p.m. on Monday, determined to disrupt Senate proceedings and draw attention to what he described as the reckless dismantling of government programs and institutions under Trump. His speech—equal parts policy critique and moral call to action—was punctuated by impassioned readings from the Constitution, testimonies from constituents, and references to civil rights icons. “This is not a partisan moment—it is a moral moment,” Booker said around the 20-hour mark, gripping a pocket-sized copy of the Constitution. “Where do you stand?” Though not a filibuster in the technical sense—his remarks were not tied to a specific vote—Booker’s address ground the Senate to a halt. More significantly, his speech became an unexpected rallying cry for Democrats seeking to reinvigorate opposition to the President’s policies ahead of the next election cycle. Hundreds of thousands of viewers tuned in online to watch Booker’s historic stand. It was a remarkable display of stamina as he pushed through exhaustion to keep his protest alive. “I’m rip-roaring and ready,” he said at the beginning. “I’m wide awake. I’m going to stand here for as many hours as I can.” Booker remained standing throughout, refraining from bathroom breaks to maintain control of the floor. Occasionally, fellow Democratic Senators interjected with lengthy questions—allowing Booker to briefly rest his voice without yielding the floor. Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, a longtime ally who led a nearly 15-hour filibuster to advocate for gun control in 2016, was with Booker throughout his speech as he pressed forward. Booker fueled his speech with occasional sips of water but otherwise spoke uninterrupted. He invoked the words of Representative John Lewis, the late civil rights leader, who urged Americans to get into “good trouble” in the pursuit of justice. “How am I living up to his words?” Booker asked. A one-time presidential candidate, Booker denounced the Trump Administration’s attacks on Medicaid and Social Security, and assailed its handling of immigration, education, and national security. He argued that its policies had inflicted “harm after harm” on ordinary Americans and undermined the nation’s democratic institutions. As he neared the record Tuesday evening, Booker noted that he had long been troubled by Thurmond’s place in Senate history and saw his own speech as an opportunity to reclaim the record. "To hate him is wrong, and maybe my ego got too caught up that if I stood here, maybe, maybe, just maybe, I could break this record of the man who tried to stop the rights upon which I stand,” Booker said. “I'm not here though because of his speech. I'm here despite his speech. I'm here because as powerful as he was, the people were more powerful." Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer then took a moment to mark the accomplishment. “Do you know how proud this caucus is of you?” he asked Booker, as Senators applauded. “Do you know how proud America is of you?” Booker said he would keep speaking, but only for a little longer. “Then I’m gonna deal with some of the biological urgencies I’m feeling.” His marathon speech came at a time when many progressive Democrats feel let down by recent compromises with Republicans, including a Trump-backed budget deal that ten Senate Democrats supported last month to avoid a government shutdown. A February CNN/SSRS poll found that nearly three-quarters of Democrats and Democratic-leaning adults felt congressional Democrats weren’t doing enough to oppose Trump. Booker’s speech, while not directly blocking any Republican attempts to advance Trump’s agenda, could serve as a direct response to those frustrations, signaling his willingness to challenge the status quo and take a stand against the compromises that many feel have weakened the party’s resistance to Trump’s agenda. "I've been hearing from people all over my state and indeed all over the nation calling upon folks in Congress to do more, to do things that recognize the urgency, the crisis of the moment," Booker said in a video posted to social media beforehand. "And so we all have a responsibility, I believe, to do something different, to cause — as John Lewis said — 'good trouble,' and that includes me." Speaking to reporters afterwards, Booker said that he hasn’t eaten food since Friday and that he stopped drinking liquids on Sunday night in order to maintain stamina for the 25-hour speech. By the end, he said his muscles were cramping up from a lack of water. He declined to answer when asked if he used a catheter or wore a diaper. When asked if he saw himself as the future of the Democratic resistance against Trump, the 55-year-old Booker demurred. “I'm just trying to step up, because we all should be thinking about doing this,” he said. “I’m really hoping that, as I said, a new generation of leaders in America can come. That generation is here.” Was this speech a filibuster? While Booker’s speech kept the Senate floor occupied for more than 24 hours, it does not qualify as a traditional filibuster. A filibuster is typically aimed at delaying or obstructing the passage of specific legislation or the confirmation of nominees. In contrast, Booker’s speech is a broader critique of President Trump’s policies rather than an attempt to block a specific vote. That said, the impact is similar. By taking the floor for such an extended period, Booker is disrupting the normal functioning of the Senate, drawing attention to what he and many of his Democratic colleagues view as a dangerous political climate under Trump’s leadership. Prior to Booker’s record, the longest individual speech belonged to the late Senator Strom Thurmond, who spoke for 24 hours and 18 minutes in a failed attempt to block the Civil Rights Act of 1957. More recently, Republican Senator Ted Cruz spoke for 21 hours and 19 minutes in 2013 to protest the Affordable Care Act, which had been law for three years. Under Senate rules, a Senator recognized by the presiding officer can speak for as long as they wish, provided they remain standing and continue speaking. Booker, who appeared to have nothing more than two glasses of water and notes on his lectern, skillfully used the rules to his advantage, permitting colleagues to ask questions to give himself brief moments of rest while still maintaining control of the floor. Senator Murphy, the Connecticut Democrat, noted one of Booker’s tactics: “Cory had a Senate page take his chair away to eliminate any temptation to sit down,” Murphy posted on X late Monday night. What did Booker say? Through Monday night and into Tuesday, Booker laid out a wide-ranging critique of the Trump Administration’s policies, focusing on cuts to government services and its crackdown on immigrants. He argued that the Administration's agenda disproportionately benefits the wealthy at the expense of ordinary Americans, citing proposed tax cuts that he said would further enrich billionaires while threatening funding for essential programs like Social Security and Medicaid. Trump has denied that he plans to cut Medicaid benefits, which provides health care to low-income Americans, but the Administration’s broad cuts across the federal government have raised concerns that programs like Medicaid and Social Security will eventually see reduced services. Trump and his allies have asserted they only intend to cut waste, fraud, and abuse from programs like Medicaid. Throughout the night, Booker read letters from constituents worried about losing access to affordable health care, emphasizing that these concerns were not abstract but deeply personal for millions of people. “How much more will we take of this?” Booker asked on Tuesday morning, referencing potential cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act. “How much more of these indignities will we take as [Trump] turns his back on our allies? How much more of a person that is doing tyrannical things—as he takes our Constitution and continues to trash it, as he's running into judge after judge after judge that's trying to stop him?” “This is not who we are or how we do things in America,” Booker added. “How much more can we endure before we, as a collective voice, say enough is enough? Enough is enough. You're not going to get away with this.” On foreign policy, Booker criticized Trump’s proposals to acquire Greenland and Canada, arguing that such efforts are undermining America’s credibility on the global stage and distracting from more pressing diplomatic and security challenges. Booker pointed to how U.S. relationships with traditional allies have quickly deteriorated under Trump. As Trump prepared to unveil more tariffs on his so-called Liberation Day on Wednesday, Booker warned: "It's going to hurt us more as a nation in the long run." Booker also took aim at billionaire Elon Musk’s leadership of the Department of Government Efficiency, arguing that placing one of the Republican Party’s biggest donors and the recipient of billions in government contracts at the helm of federal restructuring efforts raised serious ethical and governance issues. He brought up Musk’s pledge to fund primary challengers to replace any Republicans in Congress who voted against Trump’s agenda. “Here’s something that pains me to hear: that Elon Musk is calling Republicans up and saying, ‘If you take this stand, I’m going to put $100 million in a primary against you,‘” Booker said. “They are bullying people who dare to stand up and say, ‘Maybe this appointee is not the most qualified person to lead this Cabinet position.’ Or ‘Maybe it’s wrong to cut this agency we created together in Congress,‘” he continued. A symbol of Democratic frustration Since Trump’s election, Democrats have struggled to present a unified strategy against a White House that has frequently outmaneuvered them. The party’s progressive wing was particularly incensed last month when ten Senate Democrats joined Republicans in voting for a Trump-backed budget deal to keep the government open, a move that many on the left saw as a capitulation. Booker’s speech appears designed to reassure the party’s base that Democratic leaders are willing to fight. “The threats to the American people and American democracy are grave and urgent,” Booker said. “And we all must do more to stand against them.” The White House dismissed Booker’s speech as political theater. A spokesperson mocked the senator’s effort in a statement to Fox News, calling it “another ‘I am Spartacus’ moment,” referencing Booker’s remarks during the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. “When will he realize he’s not Spartacus—he’s a spoof?” the statement said. The effectiveness of the strategy depends on how it resonates with the public and whether it ultimately shifts the political conversation. Booker’s marathon speech, while powerful, is unlikely to directly impact the broader legislative landscape—but it could serve to embolden Democrats who feel increasingly sidelined in a Senate controlled by Republicans. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer praised Booker’s efforts, calling them a vital stand against the “huge dangers that face [Americans] with this Trump-DOGE-Musk Administration.” “Your strength, your fortitude, your clarity has just been nothing short of amazing and all of America is paying attention to what you’re saying,” Schumer said on the Senate floor. “All of America needs to know there’s so many problems, the disastrous actions of this administration.” Who is Cory Booker? With some Democrats eager for new party leadership, the effort by Booker could elevate his status within the party and position him as a leading figure in the opposition to Trump. A former mayor of Newark, N.J., Booker, 55, was once seen as a fast-rising star in the political world, known for his charisma, optimism, and progressive policies. He served as Newark’s mayor from 2006 to 2013, earning national attention for his efforts to revitalize the city and his activism on issues of social justice. He was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2013. When he launched a presidential bid in 2019, he struggled to gain traction in a crowded field.

Even under normal circumstances, the California bar exam is one final harrowing hurdle before aspiring lawyers can practice. But last week was worse than any other, as they were thrown into limbo by technical glitches, delays and what many said were bizarrely written questions on a revamped test that didn’t match anything in preparation. The faulty rollout last week of the new licensing test, which was approved by the California Supreme Court in October and was touted by the state bar as a way to save money, has outraged test takers and the law school community at large, and prompted an investigation by California lawmakers and a lawsuit. “You can talk to any attorney — because they have all been through the bar experience — and they will tell you how hard it is and how stressful it is to go through the bar exam,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law. “To have to then take it again because of the incompetence of the bar is inexcusable,” said Mr. Chemerinsky, who had raised concerns along with other law school deans about the new exam before it was approved. The botched exam, which is administered digitally, has left test takers in a bind that puts their career aspirations and personal finances in jeopardy. Many took weeks off work and missed time with family — and have job offers contingent on passing the February exam. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT “I just kind of feel ripped off,” said Zack Defazio-Farrell, who took the exam last week. He added: “You spend a lot of money preparing. You spend a lot of time not making money. And this happens.” Test takers reported a range of technological problems over the course of the two-day exam, which on Day 1 included five one-hour essay sessions and a 90-minute section that assesses the ability to carry out legal tasks, and on Day 2 involved 200 multiple choice questions over the course of four 90-minute sessions. Test takers said they had encountered delays of over an hour to gain access to the exam, and some said they could not access the test at all. Others reported chronic freezing and lags, and an unresponsive copy and paste function. Some also said the questions were written in a strange manner, were missing key facts, contained typos or simply did not make sense. And according to the state bar, there were reports that on-site proctors often did not have answers to basic questions. The technology and proctoring of the exam was provided by the company Meazure Learning, which provided the ability to take the exam remotely, a change from previous years. The company now faces a class-action lawsuit by test takers. Meazure Learning could not be reached for comment. On its website, the company says it has more than 30 years of experience successfully launching licensing programs. “We excel at developing fair, reliable and secure exams that you can trust,” it says. The state bar, which said in August that the new test would save the organization up to $3.8 million annually, said that it was examining whether the company’s performance had failed to meet its contractual obligations and that a full accounting of how many people had experienced issues was still underway on Saturday. Tom Umberg, a state senator who chairs the body’s judiciary committee, which is tasked in part with funding the state bar, said there would be an inquiry. “We are going to be doing a deep dive as to what happened and how to make sure this doesn’t happen again,” he said. The new exam was written by Kaplan North America, a test preparation company. It replaced questions by the National Conference of Bar Examiners, which writes the exams in a majority of states. The state bar said that the questions developed by Kaplan had undergone the same reviews as previous exam questions. Russell Schaffer, a spokesman for Kaplan, said in a statement that “the portion of the exam we wrote was subjected to a rigorous quality control process.” He added that the company was unaware of any questions it was responsible for that contained typos. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT For generations, California’s bar exam was widely considered the nation’s hardest. Even elite law students often had to take it more than once to clear the high threshold for passage. Former governors Jerry Brown and Pete Wilson and former Vice President Kamala Harris are among the many famous lawmakers who failed the California bar on their first try. The threshold for passing was lowered slightly several years ago, but the test still remains exceptionally rigorous relative to exams in the rest of the United States. Some have said the bar was aware of glitches months in advance, after an experimental exam in November contained technical issues for some. But the bar said those problems were isolated. The state bar appeared to anticipate issues with the new exam before the rollout ahead of last week. Before the test, it offered people who withdrew from or failed the February exam a fee waiver for the next test date. Exams are administered twice a year, in February and July. “This new exam has not rolled out the way it should have, and we, the board, apologize along with state bar leadership and staff,” the bar’s board of trustees said in a statement on Feb 21. “The continued issues with testing locations, scheduling, technical issues and communication lapses have distracted applicants from their studies and created confusion.” Of the 5,600 people who registered for the February exam, 1,066 withdrew, the state bar said. On Friday, the state bar said it was looking into remedies for those who took the exam and experienced technical difficulties, including conducting analyses to adjust scores. Mr. Chemerinsky has called on the bar to offer provisional licenses to test takers and revert to the old exam in the future. For some of those who were not able to complete the exam, the bar offered a chance to retake the test this week. But that opportunity has been delayed to later this month after some test takers allegedly leaked the questions online. But for those who don’t get a chance to retake the test this month, it means waiting until July — which provides little comfort. Some said that may be too late to avoid devastating financial situations dependent on becoming licensed by May, when February test results are released. “If I have to take it in July, I probably will not be living in California anymore,” said Alexandra Sennet, who said she was hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt from law school. She added that she has a job offer that is contingent on her becoming licensed in May. Ms. Sennet said she was also in debt paying for bills associated with a spinal injury she sustained after a car accident. That injury forced her to miss last July’s bar exam and has limited her ability to work a regular job. “I’m banking on this to pay my bills, literally,” she said, adding, “This is my livelihood.” Mr. Defazio-Farrell said he was unsure how he was going to pay off his student loans without a lawyer’s salary. “I’m not employed at the moment, and getting back into it is going to be difficult without a license,” he said. For others, the thought of committing yet more time for the test presents more than financial anxiety. Becky Hoffman, 38, said she decided to pursue becoming a lawyer in part to give her three young children a better life, and sacrificed spending time with them over the past three and half years during law school. She wrote over 45 essays and took over 1,600 multiple choice questions to prepare in the weeks leading up to the exam. After the second day of testing ran late on Wednesday because of glitches, Ms. Hoffman stepped outside the testing site where her wife and children were waiting to take her home. “I tried my hardest to just be brave and tell them that it’s over, and mommy is done, and I’m so happy to be able to spend more time with you,” she said. “And I don’t know if that’s true or not.”

Only about a quarter of the Earth’s tropical cyclones form in the Southern Hemisphere. When these storms have sustained winds of 74 m.p.h. or greater, they would be called hurricanes in the Atlantic, but here, they are called cyclones. The only other difference is that, in the Southern Hemisphere, cyclones spin clockwise (hurricanes spin counterclockwise). Cyclones can strike eastern Africa, primarily Madagascar, as well as the western, northern and eastern coasts of Australia and surrounding island nations. The season here runs opposite the rest of the world, typically beginning in late October and running through May. Peaks in activity vary depending on the region, but normally, activity is highest in late February and early March. Sources and notes Tracking map Tracking data is from the National Hurricane Center. The map shows probabilities of at least 5 percent. The forecast is for up to five days, with that time span starting up to three hours before the reported time that the storm reaches its latest location. Wind speed probability data is not available north of 60.25 degrees north latitude. Wind arrivals table Arrival times are generated from a New York Times analysis of National Hurricane Center data. Geographic locations use data from the U.S. Census Bureau and Natural Earth. Time zones are based on Google. The table shows predicted arrival times of sustained, damaging winds of 58 m.p.h. or more for select cities with a chance of such winds reaching them. If damaging winds reach a location, there is no more than a 10 percent chance that they will arrive before the “earliest reasonable” time and a 50 percent chance they will arrive before the “most likely” time. Radar map Radar imagery is from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration via Iowa State University. These mosaics are generated by combining individual radar stations that comprise the NEXRAD network. Storm surge map Storm surge data is from the National Hurricane Center. Forecasts only include the United States Gulf and Atlantic coasts, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The actual areas that could become flooded may differ from the areas shown on this map. This map accounts for tides, but not waves and not flooding caused by rainfall. The map also includes intertidal areas, which routinely flood during typical high tides. Satellite map Imagery is from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Japanese Meteorological Agency via the Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere. Precipitation map Data for multi-day forecasts or observed rainfall totals are from the National Weather Service. The 1-day forecast is from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Firefighters on Monday were working to contain more than 170 wildfires in North and South Carolina that have prompted evacuations, officials said. Heavy smoke blanketed the Carolina Forest area, a community just west of Myrtle Beach where the largest fire raged across 1,600 acres, and visibility in the area was “very low,” the Horry County Fire Rescue said on Monday. The Carolina Forest fire was 30 percent contained, according to the South Carolina Forestry Commission. Those who had evacuated from Carolina Forest were authorized to return home on Sunday, but officials warned residents to stay vigilant amid dry and windy conditions. South Carolina’s governor, Henry McMaster, declared a state of emergency on Sunday and said that a statewide burn ban would remain in effect indefinitely. The South Carolina Forestry Commission was dropping water from airplanes to battle the blaze. An air-quality alert warned residents of Horry County, which includes Myrtle Beach, to stay indoors on Monday, because smoke and concentrations of dust and soot may reach or exceed unhealthy levels, the South Carolina Department of Environmental Services said. Julinna Oxley, a philosophy professor at Coastal Carolina University, said she and her two teenagers and two cats evacuated from their home in Carolina Forest on Sunday night as the air quality became unbearable. “The air purifiers just could not keep up with the amount of smoke that was in the house,” she said. “You could literally see it.” Ms. Oxley said she has evacuated many times in the past because of possible hurricanes, but this was the first time she had done so because of a wildfire. “With a hurricane, you think even if you get hit, you’re going to go back and you’re going to have something,” she said. But with a fire, if a fire hits your house, all of your stuff is gone.” She packed her car with items that were irreplaceable and drove to her parents’ house in the next town over. Video posted on social media from Sunday morning showed firefighters battling flames near houses. But no injuries have been reported and no buildings have been lost, according to Horry County officials. Another fire in Horry County that burned about 800 acres was 80 percent contained as of Sunday afternoon, the Forestry Commission said on social media. Rain showers on Wednesday could help with containment, the Environmental Services Department said in its statement on Monday. In North Carolina, a brush fire in the mountains threatened Tryon and Saluda, small communities in the Blue Ridge Mountains about 40 miles south of Asheville. The fire had burned nearly 500 acres and was 30 percent contained as of Monday morning, according to Polk County Emergency Management, and crews were reinforcing fire lines. The fire was caused by a downed power line and quickly spread up a mountain, threatening several buildings, according to Saluda Fire and Rescue. The fires ignited while a large portion of the southeastern United States was under a red-flag warning, an alert from the National Weather Service. The agency said on Monday that a “critical to extreme” fire weather danger across much of the Southern High Plains would continue through the early to middle part of the week. The fires also affected Georgia, where the forestry commission said on social media that 137 wildfires had burned 2,390 acres on Saturday. Conditions were “slightly better” on Sunday, the agency said, and it cautioned residents against doing anything that could spark a fire. Gusty winds, dry air and afternoon high temperatures in the low 70s helped fuel the rapid spread of the flames. South Carolina also had unusually low rainfall in February, and the vegetation is dry. Heather Budner, who lives in Carolina Forest, said she woke up Monday morning and felt a scratchiness in her throat because of all the smoke, as if she had spent the night next to a bonfire. “It’s very unsettling to wake up inside your house feeling like you’re outside camping,” she said. She said she would consider evacuating and sleeping elsewhere on Monday night if conditions did not improve, but hoped that the rising temperature and a slight breeze would help clear the smoke away. Myrtle Beach has recorded 2.3 inches of rain since Jan. 1, far less than the 6.30 inches of rain that is considered normal for this time of year. North Carolina was a bit wetter last month, though it also received below-average rainfall.

President Donald Trump announced Tuesday evening that he would be selling a “gold card,” allowing foreign-born potential immigrants a pathway to citizenship for $5 million. “You have a green card. This is a gold card,” the President told reporters in the Oval Office. “We’re going to be putting a price on that card of about $5 million and that’s going to give you green card privileges, plus it’s going to be a route to citizenship. And wealthy people will be coming into our country by buying this card.” The President said that cards would begin to be sold in “about two weeks,” though experts warn that the newly-announced program cannot be done by Trump alone. “A President can't create a visa. That's for Congress to do,” says Lori Nessel, a professor at Seton Hall University’s School of Law. The Trump Administration has been looking for ways to cut the U.S. deficit through new agencies like the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), and the “gold card” could be just one such way the President is hoping to increase revenue. An Oct. 28, 2024, analysis of the Trump Administration’s fiscal plan found that it would likely increase the deficit by $7.75 trillion over the next decade. Last year, the federal deficit reached $1.83 trillion, according to fiscal data by the U.S. Treasury Department. The announcement of the program also arrives as the Administration continues its crackdown on immigration, attempting to shut down asylum at the border and committing to enacting the “largest deportation operation” in U.S. history. On Tuesday, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that, with “limited exceptions,” all undocumented immigrants aged 14 or older “who were not fingerprinted or registered when applying for a U.S. visa and who remain in the United States for 30 days or longer” have to sign up for an immigration registry. Experts say that the program shows the Administration’s priorities when it comes to immigration. “To say, on the one hand, we are going to deport everyone in this country who's here without permission and we are going to close down our borders. And then, at the same time, say we're going to dramatically increase the number of people that can come in—if they've got millions of dollars—it's very clear messaging in terms of who's wanted in American society,” says Nessel. While there are arguably more questions about the potential gold cards than answers at present, here’s what we know so far. What is Trump's "gold card" route to citizenship? Trump’s “gold card” would essentially allow wealthy foreigners to pay their way to American citizenship through a $5 million dollar fee. The “gold card” would replace the existing EB-5 immigrant investor visa program, which allows foreign investors to apply for lawful permanent residence if they invest in commercial enterprises and plan to create or preserve 10 permanent full-time jobs for U.S. workers, according to USCIS. While the “gold card” visa may appear similar, experts warn that EB-5 has guardrails in place to specifically prevent the rich and wealthy from being able to purchase citizenship. “It's not about paying the government millions of dollars to get a visa. It's about showing that you have the capital available to actually improve our economy,” says Nessel. Even for those who are granted an EB-5, the green card they receive is conditional for two years “specifically, out of concern that it is not just buying your way in,” Nessel explains. “Within 90 days of that two-year period ending, the investor has to document and show that they actually have done what they said they would do, and they are creating jobs in the [U.S.] economy.” Nessel notes that similar visa programs in other countries have been shut down to a variety of concerns, including money laundering and tax evasion. A program that has drawn comparisons in Spain, which required incoming immigrants to purchase property, will officially close this April due to concerns it is making housing unaffordable for locals. During his first Cabinet meeting on Wednesday, Trump said there was a “thirst” for the “gold card” visa and touted it as a way to attract entrepreneurs. “Companies can buy gold cards and, in exchange, get those visas to hire new employees,” the President said. “No other country can do this because people don’t want to go to other countries. They want to come here.” How might Trump's "gold card" work? It is not clear how Trump’s “gold card” would work. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said at the Oval Office that potential applicants for the “gold card” visa would have to go through a vetting process to ensure they are “wonderful world-class global citizens,” but did not give further details. When asked by the press whether Russian oligarchs could apply to the program, Trump said: “Possibly. I know some Russian oligarchs who are very nice people.” The legality of the “gold card” visa is also in question. The EB-5 program, which the Administration said they were replacing, was created by Congress in 1990. That program allows potential immigrants who invest $1,050,000, or $800,000 in targeted employment areas—meaning rural areas or areas experiencing high unemployment—to apply for a green card, though there are a number of other qualifications applicants have to meet and it can be a rather lengthy process. “The EB-5 program was created by Congress. It's in statute. The President doesn't have the authority to override [that],” says Jorge Loweree, the managing director of programs at the American Immigration Council. The EB-5 visa has an annual cap of about 10,000 visas a year, or some 7.1% of the 140,000 employment-based visas available every fiscal year, per the State Department. It's possible that there will be no caps on “gold card” visas like there are for all other visas to the U.S. “200,000 of these gold, green cards is $1 trillion to pay down our debt and that’s why the President is doing it,” Lutnick said during Trump’s first Cabinet meeting. “Because we are going to balance this budget and we are going to pay off the debt under President Trump.” Speaking to Fox News, Lutnick said the number of people waiting for such a visa was even higher, estimating it to be 250,000, though it is not clear where he got that number from. Lutnick has been a vocal critic of the program. On Tuesday, he called it “full of nonsense, make-believe, and fraud,” and referred to it as a “way to get a green card that was low-price.” How are government officials reacting to Trump's “gold card” proposal? Some officials have been critical of Trump’s newly-announced proposal. Rep. Ro Khanna of California, a Democrat, said that he thought immigration should follow a merit-based approach, and asked for reform to the H-1B visa, which allows U.S. employers to sponsor foreign-born workers in a specialty occupation. “We should welcome talented workers to America who will bring their creativity and productivity while also reforming the H1-B program to prevent abuses," Khanna said to Newsweek. Rep. Jake Auchincloss, a Democrat from Massachusetts, also called out Trump’s plan. “It's typical Trump policy in which he takes a kernel of a legitimately good idea which is that we do need immigration reform… and he takes it to a corrupt and counterproductive place,” he told CNN. “We were talking about having scientists come to America to cure disease and now he takes it to ‘let's have Russian oligarchs here,’ to come to America and play golf with him.”